jonpais

Release date 2019. ?

By the same token, because the 1DX mkII screams professional, it might very well allow you access to spots denied to the selfie crowd.

Link? Can you corroborate that statement?

If Sony’s press release ‘reeks of desperation’, one could with equal justification accuse Nikon’s timing of their announcement as a last-ditch effort to stem the tide of their customers from switching over to Sony. But the very idea of Sony - a technological powerhouse - trembling before the likes of Nikon seems ludicrous on its face.

It doesn’t take a degree in math to realize that Sony has been innovating like a bat out of hell, with the rapid development of new products (some would even say too rapid!), the best sensors on the market and an aggressive pricing and marketing strategy while Nikon and Canon have been stagnating. FWIW, Nikon referred to the very same research group (NPD) when boasting of the number one spot back in December 2017. And in June of this year, Sony snagged the number one position in FF ILCs in China.

I’d never heard of anyone ever doing that either. I assumed it must be a typo or something.

It’s axiomatic.

It’s complicated. Say you’re a wedding shooter and you’re in love with the stunning colors from camera A. But your hit rate is low bcs of unreliable AF. Or your partner’s camera just returned to factory reset right in the middle of the reception. You’re not overly fond of the green tint you’ve gotta remove in post, but with camera B, your hit rate’s now somewhere between 95-98%... -from someone who just switched to Sony (not me!)

It can be closed. This is for the Canon C200, not the batcam. Or am I missing sthg?

While it’s a nice idea and all, it sells for $400. So in a sense, we can deceive ourselves into believing the batcam is giving us $1,700+ of real value now. ?

I’m only responding here to comments like, ‘well, duh... they’re the only ones who’ve released a new camera in the past six months,’ or who suggest the numbers are fake. Both DSLR manufacturers, who sell coveted premium pro cameras costing upwards of $6,000 and still manage to cripple their 4K video (if they offer it at all) by either unacceptably cropping the image, using pixel binning, disabling histograms or zebras, switching from DPAF to CDAF in video or giving us a miserly number of AF points in the center of the frame, saying goodbye to face tracking or using outdated codecs, as well as mirrorless manufacturers who fall far behind in key areas like battery life and autofocus, with bizarre constrictions on HDMI out and curiously missing critical exposure aids have allowed Sony to take the lead where video is concerned.

Until I went Sony, I had no idea what people were talking about when they said that these companies made all their money on lenses! ?

wait.

It looks pretty small when placed beside my wallet. ?

Four out of ten full frame cameras sold in the first half of 2018 were manufactured by Sony. It’s also been reported that in the overall mirrorless market, Sony has held the No.1 spot in both dollars and units for more than six years. The company attributes much of its recent success to the overwhelming popularity of the a7r III, a7 III and a9 full frame mirrorless cameras. source In my own view, I paid $2,700 for the a7 III + Voigtlander 65mm f/2. In absolute terms, that may seem like a lot of money - but when you consider that the ‘basic’ model shares much of the DNA of the a9 and a7r III and in some ways even outperforms Sony’s flagship models costing as much as double the a7 III; and that the APO-Lanthar has been favorably compared to Zeiss Otus optics selling for $4,000 - it can be considered a bargain.

If he’s asking that much for it, it must be in great demand, to paraphrase an esteemed member of our community. ?

Film isn’t meant to be looked at one frame at a time. ?

pseudoscience sums it up quite nicely methinks.

Outstanding video for sure.

Thinking small is sometimes a good thing. All these reviewers pushing the DJI Ronin S - hell, if you’re shooting with a GX or Sony, there’s no need to lug around a four-pound gimbal that costs hundreds of dollars more.

Reading the forums, you’d think no camera suits anybody’s needs; and it’s always the one at the next trade show that’s gonna be the answer to their prayers.

Thanks much! That’s the Lishuai 700 RSV, the Chinese version of the Fotodiox Flapjacks.

Further thoughts on full frame after shooting m43 for five years. Buttons. Someone mentioned button placement in the Nikon thread - and two of the most annoying on the a7 III are the menu button, which is inexplicably located to the left of the EVF; and the lens release button, which is tiny and very difficult even with rather slender fingers to reach with the handgrip scrunched so close to the lens mount. Some buttons might advantageously be placed on the front of the camera: the dilemma being that there isn't much real estate for any. Several G Master lenses do have programmable buttons, though I haven’t used them yet. The camera is probably a nuisance to shoot with gloves on, though this doesn’t really pose much of a problem in Vietnam! I’m sure if Nikon gets it right, their mirrorless will be more popular with people who shoot in harsh environments. Sensor dust. Over the years, I’ve heard the online community complain about dust gathering on the sensor. I should preface my remarks by saying that Saigon is one of the filthiest places I’ve ever been; the air quality is poor; there is construction everywhere; and I have to bathe several times a day to get the grime off. Still, in my five years of shooting Panasonic, it never once occurred to me to check the sensor; and since I almost always shoot at f/4 or wider, it was never going to show up anyhow. But checking the a7 III yesterday, I did notice one speck of dust, which was easily dislodged with a puff of air. Detail. The amount of detail is staggering, but also extremely unflattering if you’re working with models with anything but perfect complexions. This means having to use extra diffusion with lighting, and perhaps even hiring a stylist to assist with hair and makeup, stuff I never concerned myself with shooting m4/3. The Full Frame ‘Look’. I happen to love the full frame look, but have come to realize that unless I’m shooting in the dark, for me, there’s no need to shoot much wider than f/4 or so to get the nice creamy out of focus backgrounds I’m after with the lenses and subjects I regularly shoot. With m43, I rarely shoot at apertures narrower than f/4 and often shoot wide open. Autofocus. The AF is insane, and face tracking is almost psychic. Sunday morning, I shot with a model for two hours in the Central Post Office and on Book Street, both of which are teeming with sightseers on the weekend, and every clip was in focus, even at wide-ish apertures, and even when the model was quite far away from the camera.

Thanks, good to know.

@Benjamin Hilton But it’s no good at all. Don’t judge with your own eyes - look at the numbers I’ve crunched on this spreadsheet! ?